If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the Forum Rules by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I think he should do his time in the UK. No offence, but i kind of get the idea that the usa thinks they rule the world. If Gary was from the USA and the UK asked for extradition it probably will never happen.

He allegedly committed a crime against the US, which the UK has an extradition treaty with. Therefore it is perfectly within the rights of the US to ask for extradition. I do believe that if the same had happened here and the UK asked for extradition, it would be granted.

Unless you have some case where it wasn't, but I haven't heard of one.

If the US did not ask for his extradition, that would pretty much open the doors to anyone committing crimes across international borders with no punishment. I do believe the UK also has the right to try him for crimes once he gets tried for his crimes here, because chances are, what he did also was a crime in the UK.

A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

They sure have the rights to ask for an extradition. But i mean, why does he have to do his time in the USA.

The guy probably has family, so going to jail in the US makes it impossible for them to visit him unless they are millionaires and like to spend 8 to 10 hours in an aircraft once a week.

It sure was a stupid thing to break in US military computers, but spending 60 years in a prison in the US sounds a little weird to me.

It seems as though he should have thought about that before he decided to commit the crime.

A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

Some of you are forgetting the purpose of imprisioning people in the first place. I doubt one of you concidered whether he has already paid for his crimes, or if he will pay for them in the US.

Lets say he does his time in the US, learns from his mistakes. Then he should be sent back to the UK so they can feel like he's learning something?

No, our legal systems try people for commiting crimes. Thats good. They cant determine what it will take to rehabilitate that person. So they through them in the hole and hope that solves the problem. And our re-offense rate increases.

Streaker, committing a crime is rarely so simple. those of us who haven't done it(or never got caught) can stand up and say "He should have thought about that" but, we forget, the mind is a reaction based organism. It reacts to situations. Now Gary probuly knew very well what the consequences of his actions were. But his mind told him that the risk was minimal, that he wasn't doing anything wrong, so on and so forth. That's what we do, we schyc ourselves into things. Thats no reason to condemn a person. Gary committed a crime. He should pay for it, and then be allowed to become a contributing member of society.

Extradition

While I am gonna try remain impartial, I find it very difficult being from England.
Quite simply put the extradition treaties are an absolutely one sided affair, without bleating on about them, check them out for yourselves.In short the onus on presenting evidence to extradite someone from the UK to the USA amounts to him having to prove he didn't do it, and not the US having to present any real evidence he did,conversly if the UK wishes to extradite an american, what they have to present is just about overwhelming proof of guilt.
Like I said check it out....
Its more about shielding their embarrasement (he scanned for empty user/pass combos)than any real "crime", getting to which is the crux of the matter....
Legal is NOT Lawfull as we are lead to beleive.
The fundamental LAW of the universe is cause and effect, action reaction, and eventual ballance, as Imperial empires go this one is surely out of hand and is in the process of destroying itself, lets just hope they aren't childish enough to take the rest of our world with them when they go.
Common sense would dictate............give him 5-10 years in jail here and be done with it.
This is not an attack on americans ( I have LOTS of family over there).....flags are for ignorant fools(patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels, some president said that), borders and fences are for cattle to stop them living freely while we slaughter them......to them its just business nothing personal.
AJ

Some of you are forgetting the purpose of imprisioning people in the first place. I doubt one of you concidered whether he has already paid for his crimes, or if he will pay for them in the US.

Lets say he does his time in the US, learns from his mistakes. Then he should be sent back to the UK so they can feel like he's learning something?

No, our legal systems try people for commiting crimes. Thats good. They cant determine what it will take to rehabilitate that person. So they through them in the hole and hope that solves the problem. And our re-offense rate increases.

If going to prison isn't enough for someone to realize that they shouldn't be committing crimes and they re-offend and get caught, then they pretty much deserve anything that happens to them.

Streaker, committing a crime is rarely so simple. those of us who haven't done it(or never got caught) can stand up and say "He should have thought about that" but, we forget, the mind is a reaction based organism. It reacts to situations. Now Gary probuly knew very well what the consequences of his actions were. But his mind told him that the risk was minimal, that he wasn't doing anything wrong, so on and so forth. That's what we do, we schyc ourselves into things. Thats no reason to condemn a person. Gary committed a crime. He should pay for it, and then be allowed to become a contributing member of society.

So now we should be weighing whether or not the risk of getting caught is minimal when committing a crime, instead of considering that it's a crime to begin with.

I never said he shouldn't be allowed to be a contributing member of society, but if he does his time, and then re-offends then he should pay for that crime as well. I do not believe there is a double jeopardy law in effect when two countries can try you for the same crimes. So what I was saying is that he could effectively do his time here and it would be up to the UK to determine if they should also try him there and have him serve time for it.

I don't think that rationalizing his actions is a good though, since if he did commit the crime, he deserves to be punished in the country that the crime was committed as long those countries hold the proper treaties.

I felt the same way about the buttplug that spray painted and vandalized cars in Singapore and got his ass caned. He was an American and his family did everything they could to keep him from getting an asswhopping. He deserved it and he was lucky that was all he got.

A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.